B -3 Programs of Various Communication Modes Collaborating to Serve Families - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

b 3 programs of various communication modes collaborating to serve families n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
B -3 Programs of Various Communication Modes Collaborating to Serve Families PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
B -3 Programs of Various Communication Modes Collaborating to Serve Families

play fullscreen
1 / 30
B -3 Programs of Various Communication Modes Collaborating to Serve Families
Download Presentation
Download Presentation

B -3 Programs of Various Communication Modes Collaborating to Serve Families

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. B -3 Programs of Various Communication Modes Collaborating to Serve Families EHDI Conference May 6 , 2012 Kim Hamren MEd, CED, LSLS Cert. AVT Teacher of the Deaf Mollyshannon Neel M.S., Teacher of the Deaf Teresa Davenport M.Ed,Teacher of the Deaf

  2. Plan for the Day • Brief Introduction • History of Collaboration • Similarities • Differences • Beneficial Outcomes • Action Steps • QA

  3. History & Details

  4. Services Available in WA • FRC services available to all families with an infant/toddler who had special needs. • 3 agencies providing specialized instruction for families impacted by hearing loss in the Puget Sound region • ASL/English Bilingual Approach • Simultaneous Communication (SEE) • Listening and Spoken Language

  5. Why the need for D/HH Specialists? • Specialized training in: the impact of hearing loss, the development of sign language, accommodations for listening/visual environments, etc. • Specifically trained in the development of language for children who do not hear typically.

  6. King Co. Challenges in 2000 • Referrals to agencies appeared to reflect the existing professional relationships versus provision of unbiased information. • “Audiologist told us to contact Program A” • “…Contacted Program B on our own and then got [a] doctor…” • “FRC recommended Agency C.” • “The most difficult was that they were both* positive agencies.” • *There were 3 agencies.

  7. King Co. Challenges in 2000 • Families received FRC support after they enrolled in a specialized program for families impacted by hearing loss. • Only 2 of the 3 specialized programs were designated by King County as a provider FRC and Part C services. • Families didn’t have equal access to funding and services.

  8. Concerns

  9. Program-Affiliated (D/HH) FRC Services- Concerns • Do families receive accurate information about all communication approaches? • Is it fair to families when professionals affiliated with a specific approach and program are responsible for sharing information about other programs? • Would a family avoid changing programs because they feel obligated to stay with the FRC and provider with which they presently work?

  10. FRC Services- Other Agencies Concerns • Anecdotal records show that FRCs without specific training in the needs of children who are d/hh and related systems result in: • Not accessing available funding for hearing aid technology. • Not accessing/Delayed access of loaner FM bank. • Not receiving information about preschool options/specially designed service at transition.

  11. Survey Tool • A family survey was created to capture the experiences of those who had exited Part C services. • County DDD representatives with appropriate permission to contact families placed calls to conduct an interview.

  12. Survey Highlights • Families received printed information about different programs. • Program-specific information presented by FRCs varied. • Connections to other families during the decision-making process was infrequent. • Families felt like they were “on their own”. • FRCs without specific focus on children who are d/hh needed information about supports available for children and families impacted by hearing loss.

  13. Moving Forward • King County established an independent FRC Model, relying on staff at an agency separate from the audiology clinics and providers of Part C services to provide service coordination. • Survey results and established Best Practice Guidelines were reflected upon as the model was developed. • All 3 Seattle-area agencies for families with children who are d/hh participated in the development of the model.

  14. Rationale

  15. Independent FRC • Families would know they have choices. • Families would have unbiased support as they talked directly to specific programs about the approaches before enrolling. • The model supports the flexibility to change programs if needed/desired by the family while minimizing the potential impact of relationships between families and providers. • Emphasizes sharing accurate information about and respect for the different communication options. • Ensures timely access to available funding and supports.

  16. Implementing the Model

  17. Initial Steps… • 1-3-6 Goal • At the point of diagnosis, the audiologist shares information about Part C and FRC services, providing contact information of the Independent FRCs. • The audiologist contacts the Independent FRCs, who are employed by Seamar.

  18. Please note… • Families are not forced to contact each agency, but it is encouraged. • In situations such as the diagnosis of UHL, only 2 agencies serving families with children who are d/hh will be potential service providers.

  19. Details • Data management systems must recognize that FRC services and other services will include providers from different agencies. • Original documents (permission to evaluate, release of information, etc.) may be in different locations. • Communication between the FRC and providers is critical.

  20. Program Similarities • Provide sessions in the natural environment • Use a coaching model • Staff participate in the same training opportunities • Provide opportunities for families to connect with other families and/or adults who are d/hh • Provide parent education

  21. Program Differences • Mode of Communication • Specialized Expertise • Organizational Differences

  22. Benefits • Team meetings with all 3 programs • Shared trainings • Break down the walls of secrecy. • Participate in county/state/national/community meetings and activities as a unit …….. • Families feel more comfortable and able to ask questions which reduces stress • Sharing resources, space and knowledge

  23. Q & A

  24. Local Action Steps • King County- Examples • Attitude • Created independent model • Agency collaboration to create materials shared with families. • Training for FRCs • Share info with different agencies • Your Community • _____________________________________________ • _____________________________________________ • _____________________________________________

  25. References and Contact Info

  26. http://www.doh.wa.gov/cfh/mch/Genetics/ehddi/default.htm • EHDDI documents, i.e. Best Practice Guidelines • Listen and Talk 8610 8th Ave NE Seattle, WA 98115 206-985-6646 www.listentalk.orgkimh@listentalk.org • HSDC/Parent Infant Program 1625 19th Avenue Seattle, WA 98122 206-388-1262 www.hsdc.orgtdavenport@hsdc.org • Seattle Children’s Hospital/Family Conversations 2525 220th St. SE Suite 100, Bothell, WA 98021 Mail: M/S CBO-1 PO Box 5371, Seattle, WA 98145-5005 425-482-4182 www.seattlechildrens.orgmollyshannon.neel@seattlechildrens.org